How authority works and Vaccine deniers question

[Felinez]

Hi guys! I just watched leos video regarding how authority works and how all authority on any subject all ways comes full circle back to us.

I was wondering how this gels with something like deciding whether vaccines are beneficial or not. 

If someone decides that the covid vaccine is a scam and that taking it will cause them to become sick if they take it , will that make it so? Isnt there a fact of that matter that regardless of what one believes ,the vaccine will be effective? 

[Leo Gura]

The authority issue doesn't mean that your false beliefs and self-deceptions will change how reality functions.

Rather, it means this: If reality contradicts your false beliefs, ultimately that will only reach your mind if you let it. Your authority is necessary to admit that your own view of the world was wrong.

So authority comes into play when you finally admit to yourself: "My ideas about the vaccine were wrong." And until you do that you will stay lost in your own bubble of vaccine fantasy.

Edited January 3 by Leo Gura

[Felinez]

@Leo Gura Thats what i thought you meant leo.

So, leo this video was not meant to denegrate authority right? Authority is still necessary for everyday practical life isnt it?  I mean we are not born omnicient right ( some new agers believe that we can in fact become omnicient  by accesing the akashik records lol).  We are born ignorant and require authority to know whats healthy/ unhealthy, safe, unsafe etc.

Unless someone is like ramana maharshi and has a spontaneous awakening,

Even in spirituality one cannot completely disregard authority can they leo? I mean siddhartha gautama studied under hindu sages and utilized their techniques to achieve enlightenment.

Im assuming even you learnt about the benefits of psychedelics etc by researching others work. You didnt just intuitively know that psychedelics would help you awaken further right? You required others aid

 

[Leo Gura]

@Felinez The point of the episode was to get you to realize that ultimately all authority rests on your shoulders because you are the one who decides which sources to trust and which not.

Why aren't you a follower of Hitler? Because you decided he isn't worth following.

None of this means you shouldn't learn from others. You can learn from people without ceding your authority to them. That's what I do.

Edited January 3 by Leo Gura

[Tanz]

@Felinez The suspicion come from situations where a small part of the population does get side effects from vaccines in general, not just the covid vaccine but all of them.  These companies have to deny because they don't want to get sued more then they already have. If they admit to such things then it would cost them more money, imho they should be admitting to such things and work on a test along side withj governments to properly measure vaccine injuries. The issue in this case is capitalism because if health care was universal the government  the corporations would do what they can to solve a problem because it would cost them more.  

People don't trust authority because deep down inside they are self serving and protect their own interest.  On the inverse side, we get the leadership we deserve, this is more of a we or us problem then THEM.  

Edited January 4 by Tanz

[sholomar]

David Hawkins bring up your question in his books, talking about how he cancelled various diseases by changing his mind about them, and enjoying foods he loved again by cancelling belief systems about those foods being "bad" and the like.  His books "healing and recovery" and "letting go" mention this. You really have to believe it though... fake it until you make it.  Internalize it.

To me the biggest "toxin" in people's lives in my opinion is too much ego. That's not to say you should roll over and accept authoritarian rule, but getting distracted with things like being an anti-vaccer, or obsessing over "toxins" in the diet, especially chemicals approved as safe by reputable government agencies in multiple countries.. you end up chaining yourself down with all these "beliefs"  ... even fighting for "causes" like wanting to force a vegan diet on everyone... these "should" statements about how reality "should be" and then it upsets you because you see the world as "evil" ... this is all a mental construct... it's giving away one's internal authority to external circumstances. It's robs one of their peace of mind... this idea that "if only X was true, then the world would be good, and I would be happy" .... no you wouldn't. Your ego would find a new cause to latch onto and repeat the cycle. So break the cycle...

Edited January 4 by sholomar

[Danioover9000]

   Relevant to this is Leo's video on true versus false skepticism.

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, sholomar said:

David Hawkins bring up your question in his books, talking about how he cancelled various diseases by changing his mind about them, and enjoying foods he loved again by cancelling belief systems about those foods being "bad" and the like.  His books "healing and recovery" and "letting go" mention this. You really have to believe it though... fake it until you make it.  Internalize it.

This is some major BS from David Hawkins. This approach will not fix serious health isssues.

Edited January 4 by Leo Gura

[AlterEgo]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

This is some major BS from David Hawkins. This approach will not fix serious health isssues.

Well he did manage to cure many diseases, so how would you know?  There are tons of people who have also healed themselves using belief work.  Have you ever tried it?

[Danioover9000]

@AlterEgo

14 hours ago, AlterEgo said:

Well he did manage to cure many diseases, so how would you know?  There are tons of people who have also healed themselves using belief work.  Have you ever tried it?

   @Leo Gura, according to his blog posts about his health issues, and a few videos he did on  health, I can assume that he has done the entire gambit on the alternative medicine methodologies and methods, and has exhausted the mainstream medicine methods in regards to his health conditions around IBS. While I am a bit skeptical, I do believe that he has researched and tried hundreds of those methods of different diets, different health methods, maybe different sleep patterns or supplements.

   This specific health condition, when you factor in many other developmental factors, and especially the mind/body problem, or psycho-somatic stress disorders, it's so complex and complicated, has many interplays between hard and soft problems in between the mind and body. I can partly agree with his take that David Hawkins's take towards serious health issues with hard body problems is BS. Any problem of the body with a hard problem, injuries, wounds, that are physical ailments do need ER treatment, not methods that address softer aspects of the ailment. 

[Nivsch]

The covid vaccine works, but every manipulation on our biology has its prices even if the chances of dangerous side effect are very low it is still a valid concern.

Not every anti vaccine claim is equaly false or stupid. There are also smart insights some claims are based on in their essence.

But when the benefit outweight the price, then vaccination is the better choice at least at the beginning of the pandemic it was true in my opinion.

Personally I chose to do the first and second covid vaccine, but not the third one that turned out to be not really necessary to young people, which was also right before the weaker varient Omicron started.

I don't believe complex health problem can be solved only with psychology, but it is wise to use it too. It is mainly about hard work with a broad and holistic approach over a long time.

Edited January 5 by Nivsch

[Thought Art]

It depends 

[Yimpa]

A healthy collaboration between teacher and student is key. Even masters have blind spots. The student can certainly teach the master if both are open to it.

Recall a time when you were able to challenge (and even change) a professional’s original assumptions. This is possible by not only respecting the authority of the master, but also respecting your own authority.

[Danioover9000]

@Nivsch

1 hour ago, Nivsch said:

The covid vaccine works, but every manipulation on our biology has its prices even if the chances of dangerous side effect are very low it is still a valid concern.

Not every anti vaccine claim is equaly false or stupid. There are also smart insights some claims are based of in their essence.

But when the benefit outweight the price, then vaccination is the better choice at least at the beginning of the pandemic it was true in my opinion.

Personally I chose to do the first and second covid vaccine, but not the third one that turned out to be not really necessary to young people, which was also right before the weaker varient Omicron started.

I don't believe complex health problem can be solved only with psychology, but it is wise to use it too. It is mainly about hard work with a broad and holistic approach over a long time.

   The major problem with your agnostic, centrist position, is that the majority of the pandemic situation, is very polarizing and binary between anti vaxxers versus pro vaxxers. MAGA, Alt right, and conspiracy theorist anti vaxxers are more than happy to still take your so agnostic takes and twist it to demonize and dehumanize pro vaxxers and mainstream science, and vice versa for the pro vaxxers. Also, the situation here it's untenable to just remain centrist when an unknown virus, unknown lethality but known spread rate as very high, no company can afford to be conservative and wait the 5 year test trials, there was a likely possibility that 5 years was too long and that way more deaths would happen if waiting too long. 

[Danioover9000]

@Thought Art

1 hour ago, Thought Art said:

It depends 

   Sometimes it doesn't, and waiting and inaction may cost much more lives. The pandemic and covid in that timeline was very much unknown, it could've been like TLOU's mutated cordyceps fungus that can infect and turn people into monsters, in such a scenario would you remain agnostic? 

[Schizophonia]

People should have the right to refuse inoculation with an experimental vaccine suspected of being ineffective and, above all, of producing serious side effects.

[Yimpa]

3 minutes ago, Schizophonia said:

People should have the right to refuse inoculation with an experimental vaccine suspected of being ineffective and, above all, of producing serious side effects.

Let’s zoom out and replace “an experimental vaccine” with “a society”.

Society seems pretty experimental, doesn’t it?

People have the right to leave society and live off in some cave or forest. Let’s see how that goes.

[Danioover9000]

@Schizophonia

2 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

People should have the right to refuse inoculation with an experimental vaccine suspected of being ineffective and, above all, of producing serious side effects.

   The key word there and assumption is 'suspected'. Imagine going back in time, within that first month, when most of the world is unaware of this virus, what and how lethal it really is.  It's a HUGE  question mark over just how dangerous this virus really is, now consider that 5 years is needed to test trial for a vaccine, but reports within those 2 months show that this virus is highly infectious, and attacks the person's lungs viciously, causing the lungs to fill up with fluids effectively 'drowning' those infected, and reports coming back show that just within weeks the hospitals are filled to capacity in China and in Italy, and this is all within just 6 months, and we're what? Supposed to wait it out for 5 YEARS OF TEST TRIALS?!

   And those are just the reports that come back, what if reports came back describing this virus as highly infectious, killing people via lung damage, but the infected radically start transforming and growing mushrooms on their heads, and started attacking people instinctively like monsters. In such a scenario, is merely waiting for 5 year test trails the viable strategy, or is rushing vaccine development the more viable strategy and even imposing martial law against those attacking people spreading the infection more viable and necessary for survival? Which is far more urgent to do?!

   See, the real issue is that I, you, and most people here SURVIVED, some 'supposedly' claiming they got Covid and it's merely like a cold flu. Gotcha, Covid merely a cold flu, when Covid killed 50 million plus worldwide, just like the cold flu. The real issue here is that since we got to survive, and there's psychological and cognitive distancing now, been a couple of years and more from the pandemic, that WE GET TO DOWNPLAY AND BELITTLE COVID! Yes, now Covid is like some itch, or some mere flu we get and can shrug off. That IMO is deep hubris and aloofness, and judgementalism towards a virus that can just as easily have been FAR, FAR, FAR WORSE!

Edited January 5 by Danioover9000

[Nivsch]

3 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Nivsch

   The major problem with your agnostic, centrist position, is that the majority of the pandemic situation, is very polarizing and binary between anti vaxxers versus pro vaxxers. MAGA, Alt right, and conspiracy theorist anti vaxxers are more than happy to still take your so agnostic takes and twist it to demonize and dehumanize pro vaxxers and mainstream science, and vice versa for the pro vaxxers. Also, the situation here it's untenable to just remain centrist when an unknown virus, unknown lethality but known spread rate as very high, no company can afford to be conservative and wait the 5 year test trials, there was a likely possibility that 5 years was too long and that way more deaths would happen if waiting too long. 

I understand what you are saying. The less aware you are, the more you will have to conform to compensate because you don't have a better choice. This is done subconsciously. So in this case maybe its ok to develop the vaccine fast. Maybe.

To one who have a conscious choice it was still better to do just the first two vaccines but no more at least that what I think.

I had an impression then, that from the beginning the virus was a real problem almost only to elderly, with mortality rates that are higher than flu, but still not nearly as a lethal disease but more like a flu plus especially to young people.

Edited January 6 by Nivsch

[Danioover9000]

@Nivsch

On 2024-01-05 at 10:59 PM, Nivsch said:

I understand what you are saying. The less aware you are, the more you will have to conform to compensate because you don't have a better choice. This is done subconsciously. So in this case maybe its ok to develop the vaccine fast. Maybe.

To one who have a conscious choice it was still better to do just the first two vaccines but no more at least that what I think.

I had an impression then, that from the beginning the virus was a real problem almost only to elderly, with mortality rates that are higher than flu, but still not nearly as a lethal disease but more like a flu plus especially to young people.

   This is also because the nature of this pandemic, a virus, is for the most part invisible, and we only perceive it's tail end effects, so most people can get away with playing both siding, confirmation bias, and many other fallacies or psychological factors, based on many developmental factors. At that time, from just the limited intel from the virus other than fast spread rate, and death by tuberculosis or pneumonia like symptoms, AKA damaging lungs and drowning in your own fluids, plus hospitals filled to capacity in China and Italy, was so fear inducing that really the most commons sense thing to do is take the vaccine and do your part to minimize the virus spread.

   That's fine if some will just take 2 shots of the vaccine, although it'll depend on the health of each person, and each person already maximized their health and fitness, and still have weak immune system may benefit from the 3rd booster.

   Not just for the elderly, but for young children and those with compromised immune systems, respiratory issues, or even myocarditis.